Deconstructing commercial multi-ply yarn into singles

Alden shows how do do this with spinning wheel, yarn reel, and custom tools.

It can also be done with a spinning wheel, raddle (or tension box),  and the sectional beam on your loom.   Some of us do not have space for an extra yarn reel.  I did have that space, but now there is a loom there.  And, some extra yarn.  And, maybe a few fleece. Textiles is about making huge piles of fiber into tiny piles of fabric.  Or, vice-a-versa.

You can change your mind about how that yarn was plied.

Lou Grantham at SF Fiber in Oakland, Ca got me some new toys for the loom. They let me move forward. Texsolv heddles on the tension box work much better with hand spun wool than the original 6" aluminium heddles.  This is reasonable, as 250 years ago, they were tying heddles from waxed linen thread.  Hooper gives instructions on how to tie heddles.

Current warp is 40 epi of handspun wool singles.  That means 80 bobbins of handspun on the bobbin rack for my 2" sectional beam. I have developed a true love/hate relationship with yarn yardage counter.   The warp is 10s (5,600 ypp, 75 wpi).  It is not the fabric I dream of, but I move forward. Singles bed differently, so it is not the fabric that somebody familiar with commercial 2-ply weaving yarns would expect either. There is a box with another 80 bobbins in the workshop for warping at 80 epi, and chips and sawdust everywhere. I know I can buy bobbins, but I need to practice my wood turing to stay sharp.  It is like spinning,  I need to practice.

Current reed on the loom is 20 dpi, which also seems to work at 80 epi weaving with 40s (22,000 ypp, 45 m/g,  150 wpi).  At one time 40s were the top end of "course spinning".  Mediums were 41s to 60s. and fine spinning was 61s to ~ 90s.  By late Victorian times power spinning produced much finer singles.  From here, my goal is good cloth based on 40s at 80 epi.  I expect it to weight about 4 oz per yard. Note I use the Bradford system with hanks of 560 yd, which is different from the cotton system, where hanks are 840 yd.

Warping fine handspun wool is more interesting than easy-peasy plying 10-ply Aran knitting yarn. For anybody familiar with weaving bolts of wool cloth, making 5-ply or 10-ply knitting yarns would have been trivial.  It is a set of skills that we have mostly lost.  A yard of wool cloth woven from 40s takes about 6, 000 yards, which at 17 tpi, is more than a couple of days of spinning.

I do think loom waste would have been plied up into knitting yarns.  Yes, those weavers were very frugal with their yarn, but they were also careful not to start with a single that that had knots in it. Better to ply that little piece of single into knitting yarns than tie it onto a warp and start with a knot.   On the other hand, I have read that weavers cursed their spinners for the poor quality of their spinning, so I suspect that there were some knots in the warp by the end of the day.  LIke I said, I need to stay in practice.

Broken or cut wool singles have a disturbance in the twist, which for weaving, is worse than a disturbance in the "Force".

Alden Amos, revisited

Alden Amos', Big Book of Handspinning (2001) (aka Big Blue Book, BBB) is the best book on hand spinning wool.

At one time, I thought there were as many as 9 glosses in it, but no actual errors.  this puts it far ahead of every other book on hand spinning, which all that contain actual errors.  For somebody wanting to learn to spin ordinary yarns, BBB is the best book,  and every hand spinner should have a copy.

Glosses that I recognize today include:

• It does not discuss practical mechanisms for differential rotation speed (DRS) flyer/bobbin assemblies.  In truth, 3- gang whorls work very well with 4" bobbins/ 500 m skeins at grists down to 10 m/g,; and, gang whorls are not required for spinning skeins of 500 m weighing 10 grams or less.
• It dismisses the value of high-ply yarns (e.g., 5-ply, 6-ply, 10-ply).  In contrast to what the BBB says, high-ply yarns have virtues for knitting very warm and/or very durable fabrics with a pleasant hand, drape, and touch.  High-ply yarns knit up faster, and spinning is faster than knitting.  While BBB gives the best directions for basic plying, it does not address producing 5-ply and higher yarns.
• Double treadle/ fast spinning is more healthy than spinning at a lower level of activity. 
• It does not discuss how to spin fine threads. I believe that any spinner with a good teacher should be able  spin super-fine threads of 40,000 m/g (44,000 ypp) within a few months of starting spinning.  The elements of learning to spin fine, are knowing it can be done and  having good tools that are properly set-up.  DRS makes fine spinning much easier, starting to spin fine on a ST wheel is an exercise in frustration. that become perfectly easy after some practice on a DRS wheel.  Why?! Because fine singles can be plied into fine yarns with both puns intended.
• There is limited discussion on the handling/management of very fine singles.
• It understates how fast a motivated spinner can actually spin. 
• Limited discussion of accurate use of, and correction factors for, wraps per inch (WPI).
• Limited discussion of accelerators.

All the glosses are only of interest to advanced spinners, and do not detract from BBB's value for beginning and intermediate spinners.  

My world of knitting yarn

Long wool comes in, and often gets spun  worsted with a firm twist at about 5,600 ypp ( 10s, 11.3 m/g).  Such singles were commonly used for weaving and everybody was accustomed to spinning them. Then, there was loom waste, which could be plied up into various grists of knitting yarn. Standard "10s" were a standard base for knitting yarns.

Then;
(These are not the standard names for these grists)

2-ply is knitting yarn at ~ 2,500 ypp ( 5. m/g) .
3-ply is fingering yarn at ~ 1,700 ypp (3.4 m/g)
4-ply is double knitting yarn at ~ 1260 ypp or ( 2.2 m/g)
5-ply is sport weight at ~1,000 ypp  (e.g., (gansey weight")
6-ply is worsted weight  or triple knitting yarn at ~ 840 ypp  or 1.7 g/m  (heavier than what is normally sold as "Aran" weight yarn.)
8-ply is "8-ply" at ~ 630 ypp or 1.3 m/g
10-ply is Traditional Aran  or 10-ply at ~ 500 ypp or 1 m/gram!

And, I ply heavier yarns as needed. However, my 6-ply yarn is warmer than any commercial knitting yarn on the market today.  That is why I have the kind of lazy kate that I do, and why I learned to use it.   If you want to knit objects as warm or warmer than I do, you will have to spin your own multi-ply yarns.

Medium fine wools 50 -60 count ( 25 micron) are spun worsted, sometimes at 11,200 ypp (25 m/g)

3-ply makes a quicky lace yarn at 3,360 ypp

Then a 6-ply yarn from those singles is the preferred sock yarn at ~ 1,700 ypp or 3.4 m/g


Medium fine wools 40 -60 count ( 25 micron) are spun worsted, sometimes at 30,000 ypp or ~60 m/g
3-ply from this makes a nice lace yarn at ~ 8,000 ypp
6-ply makes a better sock yarn at ~ 4,000 ypp

Fine wools (finer than 60 count) may get spun at their spin count ~ 40,000 ypp or 100 m/g, which can be plied as needed. Or, they may be prepared into woolen spun versions of any of the above.

Note, The post above covers grists that vary by a factor of  8.   In truth, I have no problem spinning thicker yarns, because like a musician, I do my scales on a regular basis and practice spinning different grists of yarn.   On the other hand, I rarely do spin  singles thicker than 1-cut woolen (1,640 ypp).  As 2-ply that yields a yarn about the same grist as my worsted weight, and the worsted weight is much warmer and more durable.  Why waste my knitting time on yarn that produces an inferior product?  I certainly have in the past, and I do not regret any part of it.  However, improvements in my tools and skills over the last few years, allow me to make better yarns at a reasonable investment of resources, so I do.  


Use of AA's spinning oil is highly recommended.I suggest the addition of a few drops of lavender oil.  Also, many olive oils are adulterated with soybean oil.  These will get sticky in storage, and MUST be avoided.  The US and Italy have good, enforced rules on olive oil.  I suggest buying an oil from one of these countries.  You do not need EV or cold pressed. You just need pure olive oil.

Note: After spinning all singles are measured for length, blocked with steam, and weighed.  They may also be dyed. For dying, they must be washed to remove the spinning oil.

All plied yarns must be blocked again.

None of this is any more difficult than turning bobbins from green wood. People tell you it cannot be done, but it is simply a matter of learning the skills and having the tools.

mea culapa

Once again, I have gotten things wrong.

The long story is that after picking plums, I went to prune the plum tree and noticed that the olive needed pruning.  Then, one of the olive  branches looked just the correct size to make bobbins - and I always need bobbins.

I turned some blanks:

Green, the wood is soft and can be turned very fast - such a blank can be made in a couple of minutes.  (There are a lot of wet sticky shavings.  Sweep up will take longer than the turning!)

I let them dry a couple of days:
and turned spinning bobbins:

Boring the ends for 22 mm bearings was accomplished using  a mandrel of sacrificial 

3/8" wooden dowel.

The  still slightly soft olive wood allowed turning the bobbin to size very quickly.  The wood was free, so turning spinning bobbins from block of "green" olive was faster and cheaper than glueing up blanks. With the 3/8" hole down the center, the olive seems to dry fairly quickly without much cracking, warping or distortion.  

The spindle turned (not board cut) whorls seem to work just fine,  but we will see how they wear.

The new flyer/bobbin assembly in service.

Now, I had told people that because of the relatively small difference in rpm between the bobbin and the flyer, the bobbin bearings did not matter that much.  However, with the same whorl sizes, this bobbin with ball bearings seems to allow the flyer/bobbin assembly to spin faster.  A couple cups of coffee, and it will turn well over 4,000 rpm on a sustained basis.  Of course, that is way too fast for fat, low twist yarns, but for hoisery singles wanting 17 tpi , that is only ~6.5 yards/ minute, and with well prepped worsted fiber, 6.5 yards per minute is easy enough to draft.  It is hard on a ST wheel because the constant tension on the single from the ST flyer/bobbin assembly pulls the single apart before enough twist is inserted to hold the single together. (Same problem with a DD wheel set up for low twist yarns!)   However, this DRS  flyer/bobbin assembly only winds-on the single after it has inserted the right amount of twist to hold the single together.  Thus, I do not have to worry about twist, I just focus on drafting.  

On the other hand, drafting 5 to 10 yards per minute of 30,000 ypp to 20,000 ypp  (66 m/g to 44 m/g) singles is enough to keep me focused on the job at hand.  Finer, but not as high twist as sock yarn.

Yep,  a ball bearing at the whorl end of the shaft, 

is worth another couple of hundred rpm. e.g., 5% faster

As modified, AA's competition flyer will easily do 5,000 rpm with the bobbin running about 3% faster.  I know I have said that before, but now the differential rotation speed is better controlled, and everything is smoother.

This flyer/bobbin/ assembly is now my choice for high twist sock yarns.  It looks like it is worth while to put ball bearings everywhere.   I apologize for saying that brass bushings were adequate for spinning bobbin bearings. I was following AA's lead, as he used brass bushings for spinning bobbin bearings.

The Troll

See

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll


I have been identified as a "troll".  And, from their Norse origins, trolls have been dark and disruptive creatures that pose riddles and eat children.  Now, that my nature has been exposed, I do not have to worry about my reputation, and I can do what come naturally.


Of course, I am disruptive in the same way that Newton, Copernicus, Steinmetz, Curie, Fermi, and Feynman were disruptive;  I tell the truth.  I say things that others should have seen, but did not say.  As an identified troll, I find telling the truth to be deliciously disruptive, and I find telling lies to be calming.


The truth is: that modern spinners have a fanatical doctrine that destroys history just as surely as Taliban blowing up Buddhist statues or ISIS blowing up Palmyra.  I think that if modern spinners had the courage and technical knowledge of explosives, they would try to blow up my spinning wheel because it does not comply with their doctrine.  The have certainly lobbed enough written bombs filled with all kinds of shit at me.


Modern spinners have made a point of trying to write DRS out of history.  SG and AA certainly found 11 spinning wheels with accelerators.  Such accelerators work much, much better on DRS than on any kind of single drive wheel.  If I see an accelerator on a wheel, then I know that it is a DD/DRS wheel. Anybody that has used a variety accelerators with a range of flyers knows this.  Modern spinners that do not know this, do not know their tools, and this is the key.  Modern spinners have not bothered to learn about their wheels.  They have not done their homework.  The spinners that lobbed all those written bombs at me show me that they are as ignorant as the narrow minded fanatics in the Taliban and ISIS.  it shows me that they have a doctrine that is divorced from the physics and mechanics of spinning. It is that doctrine, that lie, that calms modern spinners.

Baby Talk

I have been accused of talking to my readers like children.The following sites talk to spinners as if the the spinners are babies and not a spinner complains! 

• http://www.spindizzy.net/Howto/dd_flyer.html
• http://joyofhandspinning.com/how-the-spinning-wheel-works/
• http://kromskina.com/single-drive-vs-double-drive-wheels/

In contrast, I give examples with actual measurements.  And, I tell you how to get better results.  Try asking Kromski how to spin fines! 

Spindizzy invokes the the same differential rotation speed (DRS) that Alden and I talk about.  We  do the math, and CAJ does it qualitatively.  The thing is: DRS is a clockwork mechanism, and  to make good clock work mechanisms, one needs to do the math, and get it correct. Then, one needs to fabricate the correct clockwork mechanism.  When spinning fines, a difference of 1 mm (1/25 ") in whorl diameters is important. DRS is simply not something that can be done qualitatively.

Joy of Hand spinning extols a high degree of twisting efficiency in DD,  just like I do.   Except, I use a tachometer and do the math. I tell you how much twist efficiency you can actually expect, and how you can improve your twist efficiency. These details are learned by doing.

Kromskina notes that DD generally spins the finest yarn.  I say, "DD will allow spinning fine yarns, much faster, but to use DD to spin the fine yarn quickly, the spinner needs the correct DRS."  The DRS that comes standard on Kromski is ~1.6, which is very good for spinning 1,600 ypp singles. Note that Kromski does not  supply the DRS for its whorls. By having the correct diameter of whorls to provided the needed DRS, I avoid slippage.  
 It is terrible for trying to spin 5,600 ypp lace singles. It will do it, but it is no faster or easier than Scotch Tension. The 5,600 ypp lace singles want a DRS of ~1.04, which is very different from a DRS of 1.6.  And, the flyer whorl that provides a DRS of 1.04, will NOT allow you to spin the singles for worsted weight 2-ply. As expressed, the Kromski statement is nonsense baby talk, but nobody complains.

If my wheel is set up at a DRS of 1.04, AND I need to spin worsted weight, I either change flier whorls or I run it single drive.  

I assure you that one can spin 45,000 ypp singles running single drive, but that you can spin such singles, twice as fast using DD with the correct DRS. And, 3 times as fast using DRS and an accelerator wheel.  That is the magic of DRS.

The continuous and limited take up of yarn as controlled by DRS allows the self assembly of the yarn. It is not discussed in the Big Blue Book, but it is this the self assembly of  yarn that makes DRS so productive. It is similar to the formation  of  yarn in the old flyer frames circa 1820. This self assembly of worsted yarn is rather similar to the formation of woolen yarn from a long draw draft. It means that the difference between true worsted and true woolen is simply the fiber preparation.  It means that one can spin worsted yarn much, much faster than one can inch worm draft such yarn.  I am sure it is why Alden gave the topic so much space in his Big Book of Handspinning.

The single drive setups are like pliers or adjustable wrenches.  DD is more like a mechanic's socket drive set. The socket drive set is fast, powerful, protects the nuts and bolt heads, but you need the full set.  The pliers and adjustable wrenches are handy, but they will not get into places that a socket drive set will get into, and adjustable wrenches are not as powerful or as fast as a good socket set.

Good mechanics have pliers and adjustable wrenches, but their socket wrench set(s)  let them work quickly and do high quality work.  I have a socket set for working on machines, and I have a set of DD whorls to provide the proper DRS for working on fiber. They allow me to work quickly and do high quality work.

These days every good mechanic uses a power screw driver/ nut and bolt driver.  It improves productivity.   Likewise, I use an accelerator wheel to improve my productivity.  Just as power bolt drivers work better with sockets than with adjustable devices, the accelerator wheel works much better with DRS than with single drive flyer bobbin assemblies.  Spinning worsted with single drive systems requires drafting techniques that cannot be sustained at those speeds, while with DRS and properly prepared fiber, worsted yarn of the correct grist/twist will self assemble a the end of the drafting triangle. A typical commercial spinning wheel can insert twist at about 1,000 rpm. With DRS and an accelerator wheel, spinning at ~3,000 rpm is easy, and spinning at 4,000 rpm is sustainable, and 4.500 rpm is possible when highly motivated.  The drafting process for woolen is very similar, but carded rolags are used instead of combed pencil roving.

Some readers have noted that some of my 10s are "twitted", (the term of art for thick and thin yarns resulting from small variations in roving density as a result of storage or transport). It is easily avoided by re-combing (or by spinning ever so slowly and inch worming the draft) .  On the other hand, when my hanks are within 5% of the correct grist and the twitting does not affect the final objects, I do worry about it.  Sometimes it is nice to be able to use roving out of the bag.  

I judge my final objects, not my yarn. I simply make sure that my yarn is within specification to make a good final object. And always I ask, " Did I get value?".  Or, Did I go over budget? Or, was my level of effort too high?  An object that goes over budget is just as bad as an object that is not functional.  In fact, I would say that a small amount of twitting is desirable, as it adds 'home spun" character without detracting from warmth, durability, drape, or hand. 

Revised Geometry

Last spring, as I started using accelerator wheels, the advances came fast and furious.  And then things stabilized for months.  It was a time of learning to use the tool.  After all, while I have seen drawings of such tools, I have never seen such tools actually being used by any other spinner.

Anyway, for the last month, I have had thoughts that the geometry could be better. First trials of first prototype are very promising.  What I had thought to be a reasonable rate of production is clearly the bottom end of the reasonable rates of production that can be easily achieved when the tools are properly adjusted.

In this version, it is about 30" or 36" from the orifice to the drafting hand.  The longer distance between drafting and bobbin allow more distance for the single to "settle", allowing the production of a more uniform yarn.  And, there is slightly more tension in both sets of drive bands, limiting drive band  slippage.  Top  flier speeds did not change much, but speeds of 3,500 rpm are quieter and less effort, so that I am routinely able to spin much faster.  Now, I can hear the movie while spinning 5.600 ypp/ 12 tpi woolen singles at more than 7 yards per minute.  Worsted at that grist goes at ~10 yd/min.

I am surprised at how much a 6" change in geometry changes the system.  I know I should not have been surprised given that even very tiny changes in whorl diameters dramatically change the system.

My two take away lessons from this experiment are 1) the importance of wheel/spinner geometry to yarn quality; and, 2) that a loose and self-adjusting system can run smoother and with less vibration than a system built to feel solid and well built when it is not running, but where vibration generated by the knot in the driveband can propagate through the system.

A system using relatively crude bearing technology can run at flyer/bobbin speeds in excess of 4,000 rpm. It is a matter of isolating and damping vibration.




I am sure that the rubberneckers will take this post to mean that I have not known how to adjust my wheel - despite that fact that I have been spinning twice or 3-times as fast as they have been. Now, if they want to keep up with me, they will need to spin much faster.  Good luck to them.

More on spin count

The distaff is dressed with 60 count flock-run long wool, and the task at hand is 40s (150 wpi) for weaving warp. I need a good bit of the warp, and I am working on it diligently.

However, spinning 60s from 60 count wool is so easy and so relaxing that I do find myself accumulating bobbins of 60s - and this is only with flock run fiber -  and not well graded fiber. After "working" on the 40s for a while, I flip the drive band over to the 20 tpi whorl and spin 60s for fun.  I may just change my mind, and just spin the warp from 40 count wool.  I had intended to spin the weft as 22,400 woolen singles from 80 count Rambouillet.  Samples of woolen singles of from 40 count fibers are not that soft, but they are faster and easier to spin.    Frankly, at this point, I find worsted singles in these grists easier to handle than woolen, and singles management is becoming a big deal.  

This rather upsets things as I have a lot of fine (80 count) wool ordered for this project- all based on the conventional wisdom that it would be easier to spin 22,000 ypp singles from finer wool. As I get into this, what I find is that it is easier to spin 22,000 ypp/150 wpi from 40 count wool (34 micron)  than from 80 count (20 micron) wool - - if you have the correct equipment.  And this goes for both worsted and woolen singles.

Let me say this over and over.  If you have a single drive wheel, then yes, it is easier to spin 40s/22,000ypp/150 wpi from finer fiber.  If you are working on a DRS controlled spinning wheel then is is easier to spin 40s from 40 count wool, and 80s from 80 count fiber.  And, a DRS wheel will let you spin 40s about 5 to 8 times faster than a single drive wheel.  NOT twice as fast, but more like 5 times faster -- or even more.  This is spinning.  Why do not the "experienced" spinners / teachers talk about it?  Because it takes some math and skill in setting up the wheel.  I think spinning 8 or 9 times faster is worth a little math.

The bobbin core on the AA#0 flier is 0.95", the bobbin whorl is 45.00 mm in diameter, and the flyer whorls for 40s, 60s and 80s are 45.9, 45.72, and 45.63 mm respectively..   These must be calculated, and not guessed. And then, a bit of dirt on whorl can spoil everything.  These combinations insert approximately 18, 20, and 23 twists per inch to produce 22,000, 30,000 and 45,000 ypp singles. That flier runs at over 4,000 rpm. The bobbin whorl on the AA#1 flier is 50.00 mm, and its flyer whorls produce 10s, 20s, and 40s. That flier runs at over 2,500 rpm.

I need a quarter million yards of 22,000 ypp (40s) singles.  I need easy!!  I need fast. Last winter, before the improvements on the wheel, I thought the path to fast and easy was finer wool.  Now, I know better. If I am going to write a check for $1,500 for the fiber for one project, I want to make sure I am buying the correct fiber.

The extra speed of from the new accelerator and the additional precision from the larger ~(50) mm DRS seem to facilitate the spinning.  Over all DRS as a technology resolves most of the difficulties enumerated by other authors discussing the spinning of fine singles. I am going to revisit this real soon.

However, watching the fine thread slipping through the fingers at 3 or 4 yards per minute does tire the eyes and ultimately bring on vertigo.  This can be avoided by spinning by feel.

I can watch DVDs while spinning.  The only thing is that I must limit wood working to retain sensitivity in the finger tips to allow spinning with minimal looking. However, with limited woodworking, I can spin even 80s (200 wpi) mostly by feel.

Spinning productively

Why, Oh Why, comb top, and then knock the fibers out of alignment before spinning?  It is doing the work twice.  No professional does the same job twice, unless they did a poor job the first time.  No the comb/diz did their job, but the spinner destroyed the alignment when held the fiber to keep the flyer/bobbin assemble from pulling the whole top into the orifice all at once, like a hungry grizzly bear eating a Big Mac.


Silly!! The spinner that knows their craft simply keeps the fibers straight, and aligned parallel all the way through the process. The combs /diz can align the fibers better than fingers hurriedly inch-worm drafting.  More, better, faster drafting to realign the fibers is not the answer. The Answer is: Do not mess the fiber up!

The answer is use differential rotation speed (DRS) so that fiber is drawn into the orifice only as fast as twist is added..When, I am spinning 10s at 9 tpi, my flier/bobbin assembly draws in 1/9" of fiber stream and inserts 1 twist.  I do not have to pull back on the fiber stream to retard its entry into the orifice, because it is only going to take in as much fiber as is needed for the twist that is being inserted.

Alden Amos and others have tried selling such wheels but there was no market.  Modern spinners do not have the skills to operate such wheels.  That is stupid because the concepts and math are fully explained in the spinning manuals from the beginning of the 20th century.  And, Alden Amos in his Big Book of Handspinning walks us through the math and concepts.

Still modern spinners insist on messing up their top by using Scotch Tension wheels, and in the discussion of what kind of wheel to buy there is no discussion of  DRS.Even Alden does not discuss the advantages of DRS in his big blue book.

When, I started using DRS, I thought that it was faster because there were 2 drive band contact areas, and hence more friction to drive the flyer/bobbin assembly faster.  And, that is certainly part of the story, but it does no explain the full increase on productivity.  The other side of the story is that DRS speeds spinning by making fiber in take much more efficient.  And, instead of a fiber drafting process there is a very efficient top/roving attenuation process.

So here is the deal. A DRS wheel is inherently faster than single drive wheel - and that includes e-spinners.
A double drive wheel that does not use DRS is somewhat faster than a single drive wheel, but not nearly as fast as a true DRS wheel.  And the difference between a not DRS DD wheel and a true DRS wheel is only millimeters - you cannot tell without measuring unless you work with DRS all the time.

My take is that any spinner that wants to spin productively, will put the effort into learning DRS; the concepts, the math, the tools, and the technique.  How productive is DRS?  Well, it will let me spin 560 yards of lace weight worsted spun single in ~70 minutes.  How long does it take you?  Yesterday, I was tuning my whorls, and running back and forth between the wheel and the lathe.  In the process, I spun a couple of thousand yards of lace weight singles.  How much did you spin yesterday?

Better DRS

I knew I was going to do this within minutes of sitting down with the accelerator.  I  just did not know when,  I was working on a big pile of 10s, and the advice from AA was spin each project on a single spinning bobbin. The I figured that with 5-ply it did not matter so much.  And today, I did it.

A new spinning bobbin for the AA #1 flier with a whorl of 50mm to make turning precise flier whorls easier.
I also moved up to a bobbin core diameter of 0.95" (from 5/8").  And it has ball bearings because that was what was on hand.

I also increased the ratio of the accelerator, so the treadle cadence is actually a bit slower for the same bobbin rpm.

With the new flier whorl, I am getting more precise control of twist insertion, yielding a better quality single at about the same speed. I like this system.  Of course I liked the old system.  That was the only hand spinning system that I knew which would allow me to hand spin 10s at 500 yards per hour.  The new system lets me spin better 10s at 500 yd/hr.  It is made out of some scrap oak that I had laying around, and looks kind of clunky, but it works very well.  It is heavy enough that I would not try using to spin 60s s with Scotch Tension, but it works well with DD/DRS.  The only flier whorl I have for it at this point has grooves for 10s, 20s, and 40s. I am going to try an make the bobbins for the #0 flier also 50 mm, so I only need one set of flier whorls.  I need to standardize and simplify.  I have dozens of spinning bobbins and flier whorls that can be combined to yield the DRS for hundreds of different grists.  Pages and pages of my spinning journal are devoted to the DRS from different bobbin/ flyer whorl combinations.  That stuff should all be dumped and replaced by 2 bobbins and 4 flier whorls.

On the other hand, those spinning bobbins and flier whorls were variations on the spinning bobbins and flier whorls that Alden Amos made for me.  And, by making and using variations, I came to understand the system.  This leaves me in no doubt that professional spinners tools from prior to 1770 were optimised for speed, while spinning tools sold after Queen Victoria came to the throne, were optimised for ease of use.

Anyway, about half of this project will be spun on one spinning bobbin with a 30 mm diameter whorl and the rest of the project will get spun on the new spinning bobbin with a 50 mm whorl. By the time, it is all plied, washed and blocked, nobody will be able to see the difference.  Twist is a bit softer, likely closer to 8 than the 9 tpi I have been aiming for  - but that may change once everything has a finish on it. Make it work, then make it pretty.  I spun ~  thousand yards on it this afternoon.  It works, and I like the bigger whorls.  I do not have them all dialed in yet, but I like them.

Over all ratio is close to 1:35.  That does not sound like much, but there is no slip so it is very productive.  I may have to do another time trial here to see if the 500 yd/hr number is still valid.  Sacrifices to the Gods of Speed and all that.  On the other hand, LdV, has plans for much more productive spinning equipment.  

The History Mash

I started "mashing" history when I was looking for clues as to how seaman and fishermen on square rigged ships stayed warm.  Academic history had missed the importance of knitting sheaths and knitting belts. Knitting sheaths and knitting belts allow the knitting of warmer garments. Knitting sheaths and knitting belts were important tools in the day to day life of Europe and GB as furs became less common, and wool became the primary material for warm clothing.  Knitting sheaths and knitting belts allow knitting warmer fabrics than can be knit with only hand held needles.  This is a truth that can be easily proven.

I came to hand spinning in 2009 because I wanted better yarn for my knitting.  That means I wanted useful quantities of  better yarn in a reasonable time frame.

However, hand spinning was in the doldrums.  Everyone was spinning slow.  Sure, I know people that in 2008 hand spun enough yarn for 12 sweaters.   Still, everyone accepted the concept that hand spinning was inherently very slow. And, they were spinning fat 2-ply, which requires minimum twist. There were discussions about which was faster, a (drop) spindle or a wheel and  "slower by the hour and faster by the week" had currency.  Most of my ideas about better yarn include more twist.

As I tried out spinning wheels to buy, they all seemed like they had governors on them to keep them from going too fast.  So, I made a point of buying a wheel that would be easy to modify. It was something that I could modify into a 'hot rod".  However, there was no manual on how to turn a spinning wheel in to a hot rod, and the comments were, " Don't be silly, it can't be done!!"  I used that wheel to learn to spin. After a couple of years, I could spin, and I wanted more speed.  DRS gave me more speed, but I wanted more.

There were stories about CPW being fast. Will Taylor let me spin on his.  I had looked at a number of CPWs, and Will's was far and away in the best condition.  If any CPW was fast, it would be Will's.  My Ashford hot rod was already much faster.   So much for the myth of the CPW, and the people who believe in such myths lost credibility.

I made a series of trips up to Jackson to meet Alden Amos and Stephenie Gaustad, and spun on their wheels.  I ended up buying a pair of  high speed fliers from Alden.  The decision was based on a good bit of historical research into the traditions of spinning.

I was not doing research for an academic paper, so I was not bound by any academic standards in any way.  The sole standard for success or failure in my historical research was Better Spinning as I defined it.  If I become a better spinner the research was a success.  There was a ton of fine academic research out there, but it did not describe a Yellow Brick Road to spinning fine and fast. For example,  The academic researchers do not come out of their academic research on old textiles as great hand spinners.  They research history, not spinning.   I had to go off road. I was researching spinning, not history. I had to think outside of the academic history box. I had to think things that nobody else was thinking.  Many spinners like academic history.  Going "off road" infuriated spinners as a group.  It still infuriates spinners as a group.

Of course my mash of  historical research was only part of the process. The mash developed a set of options, each of which had to be tested. Options that did not test as well were dropped.  What you saw here were options that worked.  Modern textile historians are not good  hand spinners.  In contrast, some of the Victorian historians that my critics disparage were very, very good spinners. (Much, much better hand spinners than the folks who disparage them!)  If I am looking for lessons in spinning, the history written by a very good spinner is likely to be more useful.  My criteria is always, "Does it teach me something me something useful about the practical process of spinning? --  not will it be accepted by the modern academic community.  Remember that the paradigm of  "slower by the hour and faster by the week" came out of the academic community. Those researchers did not do their homework to understand how fast a full time professional spinner could work.

The truth from my mash of history is that it is very possible to spin 500 yards of  worsted 5,600 ypp yarn (10s) per hour on a wheel.  A talented professional might do much better.  Nobody can do that on a spindle.  The wheel/ spindle speed debate was nonsense based on a lack historical information.  If one uses a commercial wheel of the style used by the best commercial spinners circa 1500, the wheel is always faster.  That in 2009, there was still a discussion  as to whether a drop spindle could be faster than a wheel points to the absolute failure of academic historical research to resolve hand spinning questions.  The superiority of a wheel is even more apparent with hosiery and shirting yarns (22,400 ypp).  On these issues, I will not take the word of any historical researcher that has not spun such yarns in commercial quantities on both a wheel and a spindle.  This is not something one can understand unless one has actually tied leases in a a hank of  fresh shirting singles, dyed them, warped, and woven the result.  Actually doing it lends perspective.  

I know spinners that spend more time spinning than I do.  However, I produce more yarn than they do.  And by spinning faster, I have more time to knit, weave, and do other things. Also, at some grists, spinning faster is easier. Just spending more time spinning is not a path to spinning faster and finer. (Assuming you have put in the 4,000 hours needed to learn to spin.)    If one in going to learn to spin finer and faster, one must learn on an ongoing basis from those who have spun finer and faster.  However, they are dead.  If we want to spin finer and fast we have to take lessons from history.

The lessons from modern academic research did not lead to finer and faster spinning (as of 2009).  However, my mash of history did get me to spinning finer and faster.  By my standard, it was an outstanding success.  If you want to claim that academic research is better, then show me that you are a finer and faster spinner, and that you become such a spinner as a result of  historic research conforming to academic standards, and not by using my mash of history results.  I find that the folks that assert the virtues of academic work in spinning tend to recite from rote, rather than explaining logically from critical thinking.  The  comments critical of this blog often sound like the honking of  a flock of geese.  I can recognize the individuals, but they are all saying that I should not doubt the conventional wisdom of the group.   Some are the same individuals that said I should not doubt the conventional wisdom of the knitting group, and I should not use a knitting sheath.  Sorry, but without a knitting sheath it takes me much longer to knit a gansey.  The knitting sheath saves me time, and lets me knit objects that cannot be knit without a knitting sheath.  The group is wrong about knitting sheaths.

Now,  I have blazed a trail to finer and faster spinning.  It is a path that few others will  follow.  Most will  continue spinning thick yarn, slowly.  That is their way. It is not a bad thing.  Still, I expect there are one or two who seek to spin finer and faster.

Today, my Traddy runs many times faster than it did new out of the box. That is the primary result of my history mash. That is a testable result.  It means that this afternoon, I can spin better.  I care about that.

The Accelerator

Yarns "made up" in the process of tuning the accelerator. From top to bottom, 6-strand cabled fingering weight from 2-ply commercial warp, 5-ply semi-worsted sport weight from Romney, and 5-ply woolen sport weight from Rambouillet.

The beast that spawned them:

Top with Ashford Jumbo flyer used at speeds of 1,600 to 1,000 rpm ( the two skeins of cable were done as one big bobbin full.) And, below is the AA #0 (Competition) flier used at speeds of 2,400 to 4,200 rpm.

The Jumbo flyer has 4 drive whorls.  One would expect that the little 1.75" whorl to give more speed than the 2.75" whorl, but there is so much slippage that it does not. Spinning wheel drive belts slip a great deal. Still with the accelerator, and using the larger whorls, plying/cabling goes about 40% faster than is possible just using the Jumbo Flyer (with a Alden Amos Bumpless drive band to minimize drive band slippage.)  With the stock Ashford drive band, I never got the Jumbo Flyer over ~450 rpm. When plying up gansey yarn at 9 tpi, that is slow!!!!!!!!!

That bobbin of  the AA#0 will hold about 12 grams (0.3 oz. ) of yarn. If one is spinning 40s, that is a neat 560 yards. Amazing how that works out.  With the accelerator, I run it at about the same speed as I did without the accelerator, but I can treadle much slower. This is set up with the flier/bobbin mounted with ball bearings.  A test shows that it will go just as fast using bronze bearings (with more frequent lubrication.)

Why not just go to an e-spinner?  While I do not "count", spinning is very rhythmic, and my cadence sets the beat for everything else.  It took a couple of days to get used to the accelerator, because now my hands have to go twice as fast relative to the cadence.  With an e-spinner, there is no cadence so my hands do not know how fast to move.